Salary Cap concerns

[Wedgie]

All clubs do it, try and get a beer at Woody oval in the club at Halftime, most of the barstaff are in the changerooms

Been happening for 100 years mate, you're spot on.
Even a regular on here who's a sponsor at North has employed many North players.
Koopsy didn't last long though!

[dinglinga]

so as i pointed out 4 months ago has a particular club already allocated $50K towards a salary cap infringement if caught.......


be interesting to check the financials.......creative accounting......

[Wedgie]

so as i pointed out 4 months ago has a particular club already allocated $50K towards a salary cap infringement if caught.......


be interesting to check the financials.......creative accounting......

there is a club in the SANFL who in there financials have already allocated $50,000 to SANFL for a salary infringement this year . They are a team in the top five.

good to see teams already planning for their fines..

u will see this in the papers in the next two weeks im sure of this ..

ppl just make sure when u are a buying a clipsal product that your helping pay this fine off

Hmmm, I think we can safely take your info with a pinch of salt eh dingalinga?

[BPBRB]

All clubs do it, try and get a beer at Woody oval in the club at Halftime, most of the barstaff are in the changerooms

Been happening for 100 years mate, you're spot on.
Even a regular on here who's a sponsor at North has employed many North players.
Koopsy didn't last long though!

North presently only have Simon Cox working at either of our Lic. prems. Hargs doesn't count as he is a Port player now. 1 player we have provided a job for - hardly any call for an investigation there!

[once_were_warriors]

What about your unlicensed ventures , North Adelaide Bootleggers!!

[BPBRB]

Well news to hand is that we won't have to shell out bucks for Livingston as he has accepted a job in Melbourne and told North he won't be coming across. He has been confirmed as signing with Port Melbourne one of the few VLF stand alones who have no salary cap and have signed quite a few name recruits for 2007.

[BPBRB]

so as i pointed out 4 months ago has a particular club already allocated $50K towards a salary cap infringement if caught.......


be interesting to check the financials.......creative accounting......

This might well apply to South as it appears that they have breached the cap for last year according to insider gossip. If this is true, 2 years in a row but no big penalty for them other than a fine ($50K I believe) as they negotiated this years deal when they put their hands up for the 2005 breach.

Surely if this proves correct how can the league come down hard on the next club caught breaching it like they threatened if they allow South just to pay the same fine for back to back breaches?

[smac]

All clubs do it, try and get a beer at Woody oval in the club at Halftime, most of the barstaff are in the changerooms

Been happening for 100 years mate, you're spot on.
Even a regular on here who's a sponsor at North has employed many North players.
Koopsy didn't last long though!

North presently only have Simon Cox working at either of our Lic. prems. Hargs doesn't count as he is a Port player now. 1 player we have provided a job for - hardly any call for an investigation there!

No one said "working at" BPBRB. Employed was the word used and I reckon Cox isn't the only player in that category. Just a guess though.

[BPBRB]

All clubs do it, try and get a beer at Woody oval in the club at Halftime, most of the barstaff are in the changerooms

Been happening for 100 years mate, you're spot on.
Even a regular on here who's a sponsor at North has employed many North players.
Koopsy didn't last long though!

North presently only have Simon Cox working at either of our Lic. prems. Hargs doesn't count as he is a Port player now. 1 player we have provided a job for - hardly any call for an investigation there!

No one said "working at" BPBRB. Employed was the word used and I reckon Cox isn't the only player in that category. Just a guess though.

Cox is the only North player "attending" the Northern to get his money!

[SimonH]

Well news to hand is that we won't have to shell out bucks for Livingston as he has accepted a job in Melbourne and told North he won't be coming across. He has been confirmed as signing with Port Melbourne one of the few VLF stand alones who have no salary cap and have signed quite a few name recruits for 2007.

It's not true that Port Melb have no salary cap at all: see here (warning: long PDF) on page 22-23 where the Port Melbourne coach says "we have made application [to the VFL] to increase our salary cap by $100,000 a year". Earlier in the same interview, he whinges about how they weren't able to get the recruits they wanted at the start of 2006 because they all went to Adelaide.

Now I've read the VFL has made a change for 2007 which is basically the 'carte blanche recruiting rule', where former players (not sure how defined) who are recruited 'back' to the VFL don't have their salary counted towards the cap (for the first year only?). Unforchnly can't find a link to the story now. The result? Port Melbourne have gone absolutely mental. Luke Livingston, John Baird, Adrian Bonaddio, David Spriggs, David Robbins, Tim Looby. Jaysus H.

SANFL could change its rules to match the VFL's rules and even out the recruiting balance. But really, it should either scotch the whole thing or put the cap high enough (say $600,000) that it's not a practical issue for the clubs 99% of the time. The place that the SANFL currently occupies in the footy landscape, it's just not possible to buy a premiership. SANFL clubs cannot buy Adam Goodes or Chris Judd; they can pick up fringe and delisted AFL players, VFL/WAFL and country players, all of whom generally will be no better than the quality end of SANFL players. A team that has a net salary bill $200,000 lower than another team will not necessarily be uncompetitive: giving a guy an extra $10,000 a year doesn't make him a better player. The list of the best players, and the list of the highest-paid players, in the SANFL in any one year would look markedly different to each other. To take one of dozens of examples, I'd much rather have Nick Jackman (for whatever minimal sum of money he's on) than Damian Cupido in my team. Factors not controlled by the cap (training facilities, coaching staff, club culture etc) also have a real impact on where a player goes, and if he reaches his full potential once he's there.

There are so many accusations, complaints etc about salary cap breaches each year (and given the incredibly low amount the cap is set at, I wouldn't be surprised if many of them are true). But what is the point? What is the salary cap actually trying to achieve? If the answer is, 'an even competition', then I doubt if it's doing much good. There will (almost) always be chopping blocks and dominant teams; if you look back at SANFL ladders for the 1970s (or any time when caps were not an issue), I doubt if you will see that the competition was significantly more 'uneven' than in the 2000s.

I say: dump the cap.

[rod_rooster]

Great post SimonH.

[redandblack]

Great post, but it ignores the reality of funding through the AFL.

The other problem with having no salary cap is that it reduces those competitions to the bot=ring predictability of the English Premier League and similar competitions.

The idea of a free market always sounds attractive, but is unrealistic.

[BPBRB]

Well said SimonH but at the end of the day despite an unrestricted Salary Cap or one of around $500- $600K clubs still need the financial base to pay the Cap plus the other operating costs of fielding a team and running a club. At present in SA only North, Centrals and to a lesser extent South and the Eagles would be able to absorb any significant rise and pay the cap to the maximum if it were raised to say $500 or $600K.

Your point about whether paying $10k more for a player makes him better than a standard SANFL player could be debated from both points of view (your example was Jackman vs. Cupido) but having the extra money with more buying power does at least get you into the bidding war for some of the higher rated de-listed AFL players or establshed stars of the the VFL and WAFL.

God knows how Port Melbourne are funding their big spending this year as far as i know they don't run any pokie operation like most AFL clubs and given the VFL struggle for crowd numbers and corporate sponsorships being hidden under the shadow of the 9 AFL clubs out of Victoria.

[SimonH]

Great post, but it ignores the reality of funding through the AFL.

The other problem with having no salary cap is that it reduces those competitions to the boring predictability of the English Premier League and similar competitions.

The idea of a free market always sounds attractive, but is unrealistic.

Things could be worse. We could be in Western Australia.

I'm not so sure about the 'funding through the AFL' angle. Firstly, a significant cash-flow to the SANFL is as owner of the Adelaide Crows (and, to a lesser extent, half-owner of the Pahhhhr). That money comes as of right via a formula that the AFL is publicly committed to, and so couldn't be withdrawn. Secondly, I suspect that 'the AFL makes us do it' is a convenient excuse, and would only really become an issue to the extent of withdrawal of development funding if the SANFL set a cap at $2 million and was trying to compete with the AFL for top-line players. The AFL clearly doesn't dictate exact amounts to the state leagues; if it did, there would be no rational reason for it to set the WAFL salary cap at less than half the SANFL's.

Salary caps to my mind are more paternalistic than equalising. They basically involve the SANFL saying to the clubs, 'we think that you're too hungry for success and financially irresponsible, to stop yourself from sending yourselves bankrupt searching for a premiership, like a bunch of VFL clubs did in the 1980s'. I think these days clubs are a little more level-headed and professional. If the cap was significantly increased, the whole point is that there would be no obligation on any club to pay the cap or anything near it; and I'm not convinced that a club that paid player salaries of $600,000 would be automatically 'better' than one that paid just $350,000.

I agree with salary caps in the AFL environment. Put simply, they stop a club from buying all of the best players in the land. However, in a (ahem) middle-tier comp like the SANFL now is, you don't need to do that. You already know for sure that the best players in the land won't be available to you. The 'ceiling' is already there. For that reason, I don't have any fears that abolishing the salary cap would have the undesirable result that the same 2 clubs played off for the flag year after year. Not like happened for 5 of the last 7 years in the... um... oh, never mind.

[Punk Rooster]

Agreed, the cap needs to be there in the AFL, to stop a Chelsea-like buy out of the top footballing talent through Europe!

[Wedgie]

Great post, but it ignores the reality of funding through the AFL.

The other problem with having no salary cap is that it reduces those competitions to the bot=ring predictability of the English Premier League and similar competitions.

The idea of a free market always sounds attractive, but is unrealistic.

Are you saying the SANFL was boring for the 100 years before the AFL brought in the salary cap?
If anything the comp has been more one dimensional since its been brought in looking at the GFs of the last few years.
Money doesn't win premierships, clubs like Norwood showed that in the past as have other clubs like South and Port in recent years.
Smart recruiting and getting the right sort of people at a club wins premierships, just look at past Port sides and recent Central sides.
I doubt the Gowans lads were brought over to the SANFL with the same sort of $$$ that has been thrown at Cupido for eg.

[Coorong]

I'll let that go through to the keeper, but will say just this. who had the best negotiating power, given he was clubless!

[Wedgie]

I'll let that go through to the keeper, but will say just this. who had the best negotiating power, given he was clubless!

I'd say the person who had a previous offer to refer to on top of interest from other clubs (not the smarter ones).
Scary to think of what he'll be paid.
(West supporters have been experts on what North players are on so Im just reciprocating, fair I thought?:lol:)

[Coorong]

Fair comment and I rarely disagree with you, but still doubt his base would be more than $30k with "some incentive based on performance. Doubt it would be paid up front. huho, sorry!

[Wedgie]

Fair comment and I rarely disagree with you, but still doubt his base would be more than $30k with "some incentive based on performance. Doubt it would be paid up front. huho, sorry!

lol, stop bringing up bloody Koops!
If West fans only justification in getting Cupido is that at least he's not paid up front (which seems to be the general consensus, then I think deep down they're thinking the same as the rest of us)